narutofandomcom-20200223-history
Talk:Tailed Beast Removal Technique
Possible Name From what it seems, Utakata speaks the name of this technique during an argument with Hotaru the debut episode. I do not know for sure the minute, but the next she was listed. Nationalanthem (talk) 01:23, October 11, 2012 (UTC) :Let's wait until we have an actual time frame and some verification before adding it. The fact your added kanji and romaji don't add up perfectly also makes me wary. This could turn out simply to be a description of what the technique is meant to do instead of an actual name or description. Omnibender - Talk - 02:43, October 11, 2012 (UTC) ::The jutsu was suppose to extract the Tailed Beast. But Utakata "slipped" into the beast's full form. This is likely because of his seal not being weakened(Like Kushina's had to be), or because the releasing technique wasn't powerful enough to break the seal or because Utakata was resisting or wanting to release Saiken/Saiken(Like most Bijuu do with their hosts) attempting to take control. Or the jutsu could have simply just been executed wroung or something unexpected could have happened during the release. Though Harusame, the creator of the technique, also sealed Saiken into Utakata, so it was probably just Saiken bein saiken and trying to escape. But this is no place for speculation! The page contains all we know of this unnamed anime technique that had little to no information about it disclosed. Skarrj (talk) 03:16, October 11, 2012 (UTC) :::Just watched the episode, and not once a name like the one you claimed this technique to be described appears. Omnibender - Talk - 17:57, October 12, 2012 (UTC) Not Deadly It's probably worth noting that this technique doesn't kill the jinchuriki, which is why it was used despite the pain it causes. It was always said that a jinchuriki that has its bijuu extracted would die, so this is a notable exception. (talk) 01:40, November 20, 2012 (UTC) :Nope. Harusame just tried to remove it in a way that wouldn't kill Utakata, it doesn't mean it would have worked that way if the removal had been successful. Omnibender - Talk - 01:48, November 20, 2012 (UTC) ::More logical: They hoped it wasn't fatal, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't have been.--[[User:TheUltimate3|'TheUltimate3']] (talk) 02:23, November 20, 2012 (UTC) "Attempt to" Just posting this here since I agree with Murali9395's addition to the page, and I am sick and tired of JouXIII refusing to use talkpages and just preferring to edit war whenever people disagree with him over things that are completely valid to add. It does not matter if something is mentioned later in the page, the way the article was previously written was speculative, as it implied the technique was used more than once in the series and that someone who used it successfully removed a tailed beast from someone, when it was only seen in a filler arc and the attempt failed. At the rate these edit wars continue to happen on the wiki, then we're going to find ourselves unable to edit anything as nearly every article is going to end up protected to stop users who prefer to edit war and not bother to use talkpages, which exist for a reason. --''Saju '' 13:28, September 19, 2016 (UTC) :As we don't even know if this technique actually works, "attempt to" is appropriate. No need to lock or edit war at this point, just a simple heavy-handed telling from TheUltimate3 -Sage of the One Path-.--[[User:TheUltimate3|'TheUltimate3']] (talk) 13:46, September 19, 2016 (UTC) ::Attempt to is fine. --Sarutobii2 (talk) 13:54, September 19, 2016 (UTC) :::Regardless, JouXIII has waited till the protection wore off and is changing it back to the old format, with no care for what was discussed here. Anybody wanna at least lock the page indefinitely? Or for a longer while? Murali9395 (talk) 22:03, September 28, 2016 (UTC) ::::There is no need to lock an article page indefinitely for editing. Whether "attempt to" is there or no, it neither adds nor detracts from the clarification of the technique's description as all technique uses are "attempts to" do something. Has anyone tried asking JouXIII why they want to change the phrasing? --Cerez365™ (talk) 22:35, September 28, 2016 (UTC) :::::Without the "attempt to", it just says the user can extract a tailed-beast. It makes it sound as if the technique is feasible; we've seen it used only once (albeit in a filler) and it failed. And any attempts to talk to Jou just goes out the window.. Murali9395 (talk) 22:40, September 28, 2016 (UTC)